By Sean Adl-Tabatabai

Bill Gates has unveiled new mRNA-lipid nanoparticle jabs for billions of cows, a move that raises red flags about his relentless push for experimental vaccines and their risks. This latest initiative, targeting U.S. dairy cattle amid the spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1, is part of a troubling pattern where Gates-funded research, backed by institutions like the NIH, USDA, and U.S. Department of Energy, prioritizes profit over safety.

The preprint study, which claims the vaccine induces strong immune responses in calves, is yet another example of mRNA technology being rushed into use without thorough scrutiny. As public health experts and veterinarians sound the alarm, Gates’ involvement fuels skepticism about the true motives behind these jabs, questioning whether they’re truly about health or part of a broader, dubious agenda.

Globalbiodefense.com reports: This study provides timely and potentially transformative insights into a potential intervention strategy. The vaccine, adapted from the same platform used in human COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, may help reduce viral spread among cattle and limit the risk of zoonotic transmission.

A Spreading Threat in U.S. Livestock
First identified in U.S. dairy cattle in March 2024, the H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b virus has since been confirmed in over 950 herds across 16 states. While human cases linked to this strain have mostly been mild, a recent fatality underscores the growing concern about mammalian adaptation and the potential for human-to-human transmission.

Detection of the virus in milk and mucosal secretions highlights not only the risk to animal health and food systems but also the potential exposure pathways for humans, especially farm workers and veterinarians.

Vaccine Induces Broad Antibody Responses in Calves
Two intramuscular doses (50 µg and 500 µg) of the H5 mRNA-LNP vaccine triggered strong antibody responses against both the vaccine strain (A/Astrakhan/3212/2020) and the cattle-derived H5N1 virus. Calves receiving the 500 µg dose exhibited significantly higher antibody titers. Antibodies showed hemagglutination inhibition and virus-neutralizing activity against multiple 2.3.4.4b H5N1 strains, including a representative wild bird isolate.

Cellular Immunity: CD8+ T Cell Activation
Vaccination led to expansion of virus-specific CD8+ T cells, especially at the higher dose. These T cells proliferated and produced interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) in response to H5 antigen stimulation. Modest CD4+ and γδ T cell responses were also observed, suggesting a balanced but CD8-dominant cellular profile.

Protective Efficacy: Reduced Viral Shedding After Challenge
To evaluate protection, vaccinated and unvaccinated calves were fed milk from cows experimentally infected with H5N1:

Unvaccinated calves shed high levels of virus in nasal secretions over 5 days post-infection.
Vaccinated calves showed minimal or undetectable viral RNA in nasal swabs, with only one weak detection in the 50 µg group.
Lung and airway samples post-necropsy confirmed significantly lower viral presence in vaccinated animals.
No calves, vaccinated or unvaccinated, exhibited overt clinical symptoms or fever, though viral replication and shedding in controls indicate subclinical infection with transmission potential.

Implications: A Step Toward Livestock Immunization
The successful immunogenicity and partial protection in calves offer early evidence that an mRNA-based H5 vaccine could serve as a viable countermeasure against the spread of H5N1 in cattle populations. This has critical implications:

Zoonotic risk reduction: Limiting virus replication in cattle may lower the chance of new mutations and cross-species transmission to humans.
Pandemic preparedness: Preventing adaptation of H5N1 to mammalian hosts is a key goal for global health security.
Agricultural stability: A livestock vaccine could reduce economic disruptions from culling and trade restrictions.
Next Steps: Trials in Dairy Cows and Longevity Studies
Future work will assess vaccine efficacy in lactating dairy cattle, the primary population affected in the current outbreak. Researchers also plan to determine:

The minimum effective dose for protection.
Duration and memory of immune responses.
Field-level feasibility and cost-effectiveness of vaccine deployment.

[…]

Via https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/bill-gates-unveils-new-mrna-lipid-nanoparticle-jabs-for-billions-of-cows/

Nightmare of Jerusalem Parts I and II

Press TV (2025)

Film Review

Nightmare of Jerusalem is an intriguing 8-part series about Iran’s long and complicated relationship with Israel. The first three episodes relate specifically to Iran’s April 13 missile attack on Israel, in retaliation for their April 1 bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus. The last five episodes relate to Israel’s complex relationship with Shah Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi; the Iranian role in the Palestinian resistance and the birth of Hezbollah in Lebanon; the systematic efforts by the Mossad and the CIA to weaken the Islamic Republic of Iran via funding and arming Kurdish rebels, funding the Iran-Iraq War and numerous attempts to instigate an Iranian color revolution via the Green Movement (aka the Green Wave of Iran, aka the Persian Spring); and finally the Irangate scandal, in which the Reagan administration secretly sold weapons to Iran weapons via Israeli intermediaries.

Part I

Part I provides background on the development of Iran’s missile systems and Israel’s US-supplied missile defense system. In considering a target 2,000 km beyond their border, Iran’s rocket scientists also have to allow for the major anti-missile system the US has installed in Iraq* and Turkey and the sea-based anti-missile systems on US and UK naval vessels in the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. They also risk the possibility that the UAE, Saudi Arabia or Yemen could shoot their missiles down as the three Arab countries have supplied Israel a long route for food and other essential supplies now that the Houthis have effectively blockaded their ports.

*After Trump ordered the 2020 drone strike assassination of Iranian general Suleimani, Iran retaliated with a missile attack on US bases in Iraq. This led the US to significantly increase its Iraqi anti-missile defenses in Iraq.

Part II

Part II is an extremely detailed discussion of the large inventory of rockets in Iran’s missile program, starting with their Scud missiles, which Iran reverse engineered from the Scuds Saddam Hussein fired at them during the Iran-Iraq war. Some of their more advanced missiles include hypersonic missiles (developed with Russian assistance), lightweight carbon fiber missiles, cruise missiles (which avoid detection by flying at low altitude), and missiles that avoid radar detection by using solid fuel, making U-turns and carrying detachable hard-to-detect warheads.

Caitlin Johnstone

After a year and a half of genocidal atrocities, the editorial boards of numerous British press outlets have suddenly come out hard against Israel’s onslaught in Gaza.

The first drop of rain came last week from The Financial Times in a piece by the editorial board titled “The west’s shameful silence on Gaza,” which denounces the US and Europe for having “issued barely a word of condemnation” of their ally’s criminality, saying they “should be ashamed of their silence, and stop enabling Netanyahu to act with impunity.”

Then came The Economist with a piece titled “The war in Gaza must end,” which argues that Trump should pressure the Netanyahu regime for a ceasefire, saying that “The only people who benefit from continuing the war are Mr Netanyahu, who keeps his coalition intact, and his far-right allies, who dream of emptying Gaza and rebuilding Jewish settlements there.”

On Saturday came an editorial from The Independent titled “End the deafening silence on Gaza — it is time to speak up,” arguing that British PM Keir Starmer “should be ashamed that he said nothing, especially since Mr Netanyahu has now announced new plans to expand the already devastating bombardment of Gaza,” and saying that “It is time for the world to wake up to what is happening and to demand an end to the suffering of the Palestinians trapped in the enclave.”

On Sunday The Guardian editorial board joined in with a write-up titled “The Guardian view on Israel and Gaza: Trump can stop this horror. The alternative is unthinkable,” saying “The US president has the leverage to force through a ceasefire. If he does not, he will implicitly signal approval of what looks like a plan of total destruction.”

“What is this, if not genocidal?” The Guardian asks. “When will the US and its allies act to stop the horror, if not now?”

To be clear, these are editorials, not op-eds. This means that they are not the expression of one person’s opinion but the stated position of each outlet as a whole. We’ve been seeing the occasional op-ed which is critical of Israel’s actions throughout the Gaza holocaust in the mainstream western press, but to see the actual outlets come out aggressively denouncing Israel and its western backers all at once is a very new development.

Some longtime Israel supporters have unexpectedly begun changing their tune as individuals as well.

Conservative MP Mark Pritchard said at the House of Commons last week that he had supported Israel “at all costs” for decades, but said “I got it wrong” and publicly withdrew that support over Israel’s actions in Gaza.

“For many years — I’ve been in this House twenty years — I have supported Israel pretty much at all costs, quite frankly,” Pritchard said. “But today, I want to say that I got it wrong and I condemn Israel for what it is doing to the Palestinian people in Gaza and indeed in the West Bank, and I’d like to withdraw my support right now for the actions of Israel, what they are doing right now in Gaza.”

“I’m really concerned that this is a moment in history when people look back, where we’ve got it wrong as a country,” Pritchard added.

[…]

Pro-Israel pundit Shaiel Ben-Ephraim, who had been aggressively denouncing campus protesters and accusing Israel’s critics of “blood libel” throughout the Gaza holocaust, has now come out and publicly admitted that Israel is committing a genocide which must be opposed.

“It took me a long time to get to this point, but it’s time to face it. Israel is committing genocide in Gaza,” Ephraim tweeted recently. “Between the indiscriminate bombing of hospitals, starvation of the population, plans for ethnic cleansing, slaughter of aid workers and cover ups, there is no escaping it. Israel is trying to eradicate the Palestinian people. We can’t stop it unless we admit it.”

It is odd that it has taken all these people a year and a half to get to this point. I myself have a much lower tolerance for genocide and the mass murder of children. If you’ve been riding the genocide train for nineteen months, it looks a bit weird to suddenly start screaming about how terrible it is and demanding to hit the brakes all of a sudden.

These people have not suddenly evolved a conscience, they’re just smelling what’s in the wind. Once the consensus shifts past a certain point there’s naturally going to be a mad rush to avoid being among the last to stand against it, because you know you’ll be wearing that mark for the rest of your life in public after history has had a clear look at what you did.

[…]

This is after all coming at a time when the Trump administration is beginning to rub Netanyahu’s fur the wrong way, recently prompting the Israeli prime minister to say “I think we’ll have to detox from US security assistance” when Washington went over Tel Aviv’s head and negotiated directly with Hamas to secure the release of an American hostage. The US is reportedly leaving Israel out of more and more of its negotiations on international affairs in places like Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Something is changing.

[…]

Via https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/multiple-western-press-outlets-have

Andrew Korybko

That would be a nightmare scenario from the perspective of Israeli interests.

A report circulated last week alleging that Trump cut off all direct contact with Bibi after feeling manipulated by him. For as sensational as it sounds, the larger context suggests that it might be true. For starters, there was bad blood between them since late 2020 after Trump reportedly felt betrayed by Bibi recognizing Biden’s electoral victory while Trump was still challenging it in the courts. This is a very personal issue for him seeing as how he continues to insist that he won so it wouldn’t be surprising.

More recently, Bibi has been pressuring Trump to bomb Iran, which Trump doesn’t want to do since a large-scale war in West Asia would offset his planned “Pivot (back) to Asia” for containing China. In connection with that, Trump reportedly dismissed former National Security Advisor Mike Waltz due to him supposedly coordinating too closely with Israel. Also of relevance are the rumors that Israel was caught off guard by the US’ resumption of talks with Iran and is against any agreement between them.

Then there’s the US’ recent deal with the Houthis that excludes Israel, reports that the US will delink Saudi recognition of Israel from their civil nuclear talks, and even speculation that Trump might recognize Palestine during his attendance at next week’s Gulf-US Summit in Riyadh. Altogether, it’s self-evident that US-Israeli ties are newly beset with a host of problems, thus lending credence to the earlier cited report about Trump cutting off all direct contact with Bibi.

Their rift might even be irreconcilable depending on Trump’s next steps. It was already bad enough from Israel’s perspective that the US reached its own deal with the Houthis right after they announced their plans to impose an air blockade on Israel but delinking Saudi recognition of Israel from their civil nuclear talks, let alone recognizing Palestine, could cross the Rubicon. In that scenario, Israel and the US would remain at odds during the rest of Trump’s term, and perhaps even afterwards if Vance succeeds him.

The consequences of that happening would widely reverberate throughout the region. Without the continued support of its oldest and most reliable ally, which is still the strongest and most influential country in the world despite the global systemic transition to multipolarity, Israel would be left alone to deal with threats from Iran and Turkiye. To make matters worse, it can’t be ruled out that the US might curtail or even suspend its military aid to Israel on whatever pretext, thus weakening its armed forces.

This combination of factors could lead to Israel wildly lashing out against its regional adversaries in desperation before it loses its military-strategic advantages, which could spark a large-scale war, or being coerced into a series of compromises that accelerates the loss of these selfsame advantages. From the viewpoint of Israeli interests, this a zero-sum dilemma that it must avoid at all costs, yet Trump’s potentially irreconcilable rift with Bibi could turn this nightmare scenario into a fait accompli.

Nevertheless, as Trump’s unexpected reconciliation with Zelensky shows, there’s always the chance that their tensions could be overcome. For that to happen, however, Bibi would likely have to give Trump something of equivalent strategic value to Zelensky’s minerals deal. It’s unclear what that might be, and it could come too late to stop the US from delinking Saudi recognition of Israel from their civil nuclear talks and/or recognizing Palestine, but Bibi would do well to make Trump a peace offering pronto.

[…]

Via https://korybko.substack.com/p/trumps-rift-with-bibi-might-be-irreconcilable